For much of the last 25 years, NATO has focused on crisis managementin places such as Kosovo and Afghanistan,resulting in major changes to alliance strategy, resourcing,force structure, and training. Re-embracing collective defense —which lies at the heart of the Treaty of Washington’s Article 5 commitment— is no easy feat, and not something NATO can do through rhetoric and official pronouncements. Nonetheless,this shift is vitally necessary if the alliance is to remain the bulwark of Western defense and security. Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and its invasion of Ukraine have fundamentally upended the security environment in Europe, thrusting NATO into the spotlight as the primary collective defense tool most European states rely upon to ensure their security. Collective defense is one of the alliance’s threecore missions, along with crisis management and cooperative security. It is defined in Article 5, the most well-known and arguably most important part of NATO’s founding treaty, which states: “The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.” Although all three missions are vital to the interests of NATO’s many member states, collective defense has become first among equals once again. However,three very significant hurdles stand in the way of the alliance and its member states as they attempt to re-embrace collective defense. These loosely correspond to an ends-waysmeans construct. First is the alliance's strategy toward Russia. Is Russia an adversary,a partner,neither,or both? How should strategy and policies change to place the alliance and its members on more solid ground when it comes to managing Russia? Second are the ongoing disputes over resourcing and burden-sharing. In recent years, it has become commonplace for American leaders to publicly berate European allies in an effort to garner more contributions to the common defense. How might the alliance better measure and more equitably share security burdens? Third is the alliance’s readiness to fulfill its objectives. Many allies have announced or are implementing increases in defense spending. However, governments of European NATO member states are strongly incentivized by domestic politics to favor acquisition of military hardware or spending on personnel salaries and benefits,usually at the expense of readiness. The result is that NATO military forces risk quickly becoming hollow in a way that is often underappreciated, which will prevent the alliance from fulfilling the collective defense promise inherent in Article 5. The book examines all such questions to assess NATO’s return to collective defense and offer a roadmap for overcoming those challenges in both the short and long-term.

The decision to expand NATO eastward is a fateful venture that has received surprisingly little public attention. Advocates of enlargement insist that the step will foster cooperation, consolidate democracy, and promote stability throughout Europe. But the contributors to this volume conclude that an expanded NATO is a dubious, potentially disastrous idea. Instead of healing the wounds of the Cold War, it threatens to create a new division of Europe and undermine friendly relations with Russia. Even worse, it will establish expensive, dangerous, and probably unsustainable security obligations for the United States.

Throughout the beginning of 1999, NATO has experienced a period of relative internal calm. NATO is threatened neither by a powerful external threat nor by overarching internal strategic differences, and enjoys a degree of support that may indeed be higher than during the Cold War. Nevertheless, there are potential sources of strain and tension within the Alliance. Such strains collectively could introduce more serious tensions, especially with the imposition of other, unanticipated kinds of tension or crisis. Several long term tensions that existed during the Cold War continue to affect NATO today. These include geography as it affects how an Ally perceives its own interests, French exception and interpretation of its national independence, and the real purpose of the Alliance. Short and medium term issues include: (1) enlargement; (2) strategic concept review; (3) cost issues; (4) European Security and Defense Identity (ESDI); (5) counter proliferation and terrorism; (6) U.S. technology gap; (7) adaptation issues; (8) Greece and Turkey; and the (9) Balkans.

Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop (ARW) on perceptions of NATO: a balance 60 years after, Lisbon, Portugal, 18-18 May, 2010.

This new book addresses the key question of how NATO and three of its member states are configuring their policies and military doctrines in order to handle the new strategic environment. This environment is increasingly dominated by 'new wars', more precisely civil wars within states, and peacekeeping as the strategy devised by outside actors for dealing with them. The book seeks to explain how this new strategic environment has been interpreted and how the new conflicts and peacekeeping have been fitted into 'defence' and 'war' - key concepts in the field of security studies.

This superb introduction to NATO is written for the national security novice, yet is full of insights for the more seasoned hand interested in how and why NATO reached its current state. In the more than half-century since NATO was founded, there has been endless debate about its purpose, about whether it is meeting that purpose, and about the strategies it employs to that end. Speculation has also been rife about the organization's "imminent demise." Those questions and more are the subject of NATO: A Guide to the Issues. Covering the organization from its founding in 1949 through the present, the guide examines aspects of NATO that have undergone tremendous change over the years, including its purpose, military mission, geographic concept of operations, and membership. At the same time, it explores key aspects of NATO's organization that have remained constant. These include the ability of members to participate in operations as much or as little as they desire, decision-making by consensus, and a general belief that people from different countries working together on a daily basis promotes cooperation, understanding, and friendship.

This timely Research Handbook provides novel insights into the institutional complexities of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Through a defined focus on the post-Cold War evolution of NATO, it provides various theoretical perspectives on the Alliance and assesses wider research efforts within NATO studies.

On September 5, 2009, the commanding officer of NATO's German troops in Afghanistan ordered a U.S. Air Force fighter to destroy two fuel trucks hijacked by theTaliban. Within hours, he was being investigated by German prosecutors for the murder of innocent civilians—collateral damage. Under German law its forces can only be deployed for peacekeeping; America might be at war in Afghanistan, but Germany is not. Germany is not the only country that sets strict conditions on its NATO troops. Half of the allied forces in Afghanistan operate under restricted battlefield conditions. Gen. Dwight Eisenhower stormed the beaches of Normandy with an Allied army that followed his every command; in Afghanistan military commanders must consult a checklist to figure out which allied soldiers can be sent into battle. NATO today is a shadow of what it used to be—the world's most formidable military alliance. Its original reason for existence, the Soviet Union, disintegrated years ago, and its dreams of being a world cop are withering in the mountains of Afghanistan. But eliminating NATO is not the answer, argues Sarwar Kashmeri. It is, for Americans and Europeans, still the safety net of last resort. Kashmeri believes NATO's future usefulness depends on its ability to partner with CSDP, Europe's increasingly successful security and defense establishment. It is time for NATO 2.0, a new version of NATO, to fit the realities of the twenty-first century.

This book examines the changing nature and location of NATO's operations, concentrating on the development of its extra-European interventions. The objectives of the book are twofold. The first is to provide a historical overview of the importance of the out-of-area issue to NATO. The book takes a chronological approach to this and maps the evolution of the debates that took place about NATO's appropriate response to threats beyond the North Atlantic area from NATO's founding in 1949 until the present day. The second objective is to assess how successfully NATO has made the transition from being a security actor with regional responsibilities to one that responds to global security threats. The author considers the argument that emerged post-9/11 that the key to ensuring NATO's future vitality was to expand its geographic area of responsibility to encompass threats occurring both within and beyond the Euro-Atlantic area. This book therefore provides the first detailed examination of the evolution of NATO's global role and the success with which NATO has adapted to its new responsibilities.

Two decades since the watershed of the Cold War, this book investigates NATO's staying power. This book investigates how the Alliance has adapted and managed to attend to new roles and purposes through the lens of International Relations theory. The Alliance will continue, but will remain subject to ongoing crises and challenges of change.